Instructions: You are to interview two people and record their responses on this form. You should state their name and their comments to your solution to the identified problem.
VI. I interviewed two individuals to see what their response would be to my (our) plan. Their responses are as follows. The first person I interviewed was Gabriel Huerta. He is for this bill as long as it has firm regulations. He speaks from personal experience as someone who suffers from migraines and as a child his mother kept a marijuana stem in a jar of alcohol and used it to sooth his pain. A migraine attacks the nerve system in your brain causing inflammation in the veins. The marijuana relieves the pain, swelling, and sooths the stress level. His mother also used the marijuana for open wounds, or muscle pains. He is completely for using marijuana in medical purposes and says it is beneficial as long as people do not overdose. H e says marijuana being used in foods is also fine if again, it is given to people with certain illnesses to help their condition. He did however make a point that people in countries like Venezuela use marijuana in foods for the same purpose people put protein in their food here, to feel full longer. Since people in those countries have long and hard jobs the consume marijuana to feel less hungry during their long day. He has mixed opinions over it being legal for consumer purposes. He says he has doubts whether or not he plant would lose its high effect after being processed for materials such as paper. If the plant does lose its high effect than he says it is fine to use it in clothing material. He did however say that if marijuana is only legalized for medical purposes it would not bring down crime because it would not be open to the public and people would still want to purchase it for the high effect. He believes that if other purposes for it are used like in clothing or fuel or if it is used as a tobacco alternative, than the crime could go down and then it could bring in real money into the economy. He also pointed out that the plant right now has been contaminated to be sold to give a more high effect but if it were legal the plant would become more natural again. As far as jobs go he says the work place of marijuana should be treated like the treasury. Firm and strict government regulation is to be used to unsure workers are not stealing the plant or consuming it. Overall he believes it will be beneficial for the country if proper procedures and regulations take place.
The second person I interviewed was Mrs. Blume. She says her stand on this issue currently is opposed, but that if she were to be better informed she could be persuaded. Based on the information I gave her she says that it does seem to have a few very beneficial qualities. That as a consumer education teacher she says it could bring in good money into the economy but that if the plant is not available for the general public than the crime rate will not decrease. As far as employment goes she says the work opportunities sound good as long as they have reasonable regulations. She said that the plant had purposes she was not aware of such as paper, clothing or fuel. She also claims that if after being processed the product is no longer harmful than by all means create the products. She did have concerns over the medicinal side effects but all medicines have side effects if long term consumption is used, but she did say that atleast the marijuana is natrual. Based on this information she could be for this bill but she would still like better inform herself first.
VII. My (our) answer, based on our research, to their objections and concerns are fair concerns and questions that I myself will research and their points were similar points as those made by research articles. To me this further proves these statements and gives a better insight on the publics view on the issue. It is only natural to have concerns over a product that has been deemed hazardous but they are both open minded enough to see, admit, and recognize the benefits of it. Over all they both think it is a good idea. I understand where the people against this are coming from. Yes it is true that the government can tax anything, that there are other medical resources, and other materials and energy sources as well. This means that we have one more contribution to the economy, we need another resource to be able to use, and it is natrual whcih makes it environmentally friendly. Plus as a natrual Earth grown plant, when consumed the body recognizes it as being natrual and axcepts it and disposes of it more easily and natrually.
Bibliography:
Huerta, Gabriel. Interviewed by Michelle Sanchez. February 21, 2011
Blume, Nancy. Interviewed by Michelle Sanchez. February 22, 2011
Instructions: You are to interview two people and record their responses on this form. You should state their name and their comments to your solution to the identified problem.
VI. I interviewed two individuals to see what their response would be to my (our) plan. Their responses are as follows.
The first person I interviewed was Gabriel Huerta. He is for this bill as long as it has firm regulations. He speaks from personal experience as someone who suffers from migraines and as a child his mother kept a marijuana stem in a jar of alcohol and used it to sooth his pain. A migraine attacks the nerve system in your brain causing inflammation in the veins. The marijuana relieves the pain, swelling, and sooths the stress level. His mother also used the marijuana for open wounds, or muscle pains. He is completely for using marijuana in medical purposes and says it is beneficial as long as people do not overdose. H e says marijuana being used in foods is also fine if again, it is given to people with certain illnesses to help their condition. He did however make a point that people in countries like Venezuela use marijuana in foods for the same purpose people put protein in their food here, to feel full longer. Since people in those countries have long and hard jobs the consume marijuana to feel less hungry during their long day. He has mixed opinions over it being legal for consumer purposes. He says he has doubts whether or not he plant would lose its high effect after being processed for materials such as paper. If the plant does lose its high effect than he says it is fine to use it in clothing material. He did however say that if marijuana is only legalized for medical purposes it would not bring down crime because it would not be open to the public and people would still want to purchase it for the high effect. He believes that if other purposes for it are used like in clothing or fuel or if it is used as a tobacco alternative, than the crime could go down and then it could bring in real money into the economy. He also pointed out that the plant right now has been contaminated to be sold to give a more high effect but if it were legal the plant would become more natural again. As far as jobs go he says the work place of marijuana should be treated like the treasury. Firm and strict government regulation is to be used to unsure workers are not stealing the plant or consuming it. Overall he believes it will be beneficial for the country if proper procedures and regulations take place.
The second person I interviewed was Mrs. Blume. She says her stand on this issue currently is opposed, but that if she were to be better informed she could be persuaded. Based on the information I gave her she says that it does seem to have a few very beneficial qualities. That as a consumer education teacher she says it could bring in good money into the economy but that if the plant is not available for the general public than the crime rate will not decrease. As far as employment goes she says the work opportunities sound good as long as they have reasonable regulations. She said that the plant had purposes she was not aware of such as paper, clothing or fuel. She also claims that if after being processed the product is no longer harmful than by all means create the products. She did have concerns over the medicinal side effects but all medicines have side effects if long term consumption is used, but she did say that atleast the marijuana is natrual. Based on this information she could be for this bill but she would still like better inform herself first.
VII. My (our) answer,
based on our research, to their objections and concerns are fair concerns and questions that I myself will research and their points were similar points as those made by research articles. To me this further proves these statements and gives a better insight on the publics view on the issue. It is only natural to have concerns over a product that has been deemed hazardous but they are both open minded enough to see, admit, and recognize the benefits of it. Over all they both think it is a good idea. I understand where the people against this are coming from. Yes it is true that the government can tax anything, that there are other medical resources, and other materials and energy sources as well. This means that we have one more contribution to the economy, we need another resource to be able to use, and it is natrual whcih makes it environmentally friendly. Plus as a natrual Earth grown plant, when consumed the body recognizes it as being natrual and axcepts it and disposes of it more easily and natrually.
Bibliography:
Huerta, Gabriel. Interviewed by Michelle Sanchez. February 21, 2011
Blume, Nancy. Interviewed by Michelle Sanchez. February 22, 2011